Page 41 - Essencials of Sociology

14 CHAPTER 1 The Sociological Perspective

I know it is vague to say that symbols tell you how you are related to others and how
Read on MySocLab
Document: Herbert Blumer, The you should act toward them, so let’s make this less abstract:
Nature of Symbolic Interactionism
Suppose that you have fallen head over heels in love. Finally, after what seems forever, it
is the night before your wedding. As you are contemplating tomorrow’s bliss, your mother
comes to you in tears. Sobbing, she tells you that she had a child before she married your
father, a child that she gave up for adoption. Breaking down, she says that she has just
discovered that the person you are going to marry is this child.

You can see how the symbol will change overnight—and your behavior, too!
The symbols “boyfriend” and “brother”—or “girlfriend” and “sister”—are certainly
different, and, as you know, each symbol requires rather different behavior.
Not only do relationships depend on symbols, but so does society itself. Without
symbols, we could not coordinate our actions with those of others. We could not make
plans for a future day, time, and place. Unable to specify times, materials, sizes, or goals,
we could not build bridges and highways. Without symbols, we would have no movies
or musical instruments, no hospitals, no government, no religion. The class you are tak-
ing could not exist—nor could this book. On the positive side, there would be no war.
In Sum: Symbolic interactionists analyze how social life depends on the ways we define
ourselves and others. They study face-to-face interaction, examining how people make
sense out of life and their place in it.

Applying Symbolic Interactionism. Look at Figure 1.5, which shows U.S.
marriages and divorces over time. Let’s see how symbolic interactionists would use
changing symbols to explain this figure. For background, you should understand that
marriage used to be a lifelong commitment. A hundred years ago (and less), getting
divorced was viewed as immoral, a flagrant disregard for public opinion, and the
abandonment of adult responsibilities. Let’s see what changed.

The meaning of marriage: Marriage had been based mainly on the obligations and
duties that a couple vowed to one another. By the 1930s, young Americans were com-
ing to view marriage in a different way, a change that was reported by sociologists of

FIGURE 1.5 U.S. Marriage, U.S. Divorce

2.50
2.25
2.0 Marriages
1.75
Number in Millions 1.50

1.25
1.0
.75
Divorces
.50
.25
.00
1890 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020
Year
Source: By the author. Based on Statistical Abstract of the United States 1998:Table 92 and 2013:Tables 81, 134; earlier editions for earlier years. The broken lines
indicate the author’s estimates.